Haryana

Kurukshetra

CC/17/2020

Inderjeet upadhyay - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager Karnal Motor - Opp.Party(s)

B.R.Bakshi

27 Oct 2021

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KURUKSHETRA.

 

                                                          Consumer Complaint No.17 of 2020

Date of instt.14.01.2020 

                                                          Date of Decision: 27.10.2021.

 

Inderjeet Upadhyay son of late Sh.Ram Shihasan Upadhyay resident of house no.1378/5, Vashith Colony, Kurukshetra.

                                                                             …….Complainant.                                                          Versus

1.The Manager, Karnal Motors Pvt.Limited, Sector 2, Industrial Area, Kurukshetra.

2.Workshop Manager of Karnal Motors Pvt.Limited, Sector 2, Industrial Area, Kurukshetra.

 

          ….…Opposite parties.

 

Complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before        Smt. Neelam Kashyap, President.    

                   Ms. Neelam, Member. 

                   Shri Issam Singh Sagwal, Member.                                                        

 

Present:      Sh. B.R.Bharti Advocate for the complainant.

                   Ops ex parte.

ORDER

                                                                         

                    This is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 moved by complainant Inderjeet Upadhyay against  Karnal Motors etc., the opposite parties.

2.                The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant  purchased a Maruti Swift  Dzire  ZDI  Car (Diesel) from OP No.1 and got its insured from United India Insurance Co. Limited Kurukshetra and the said policy was valid from 26.01.2019 to 27.01.2020 and paid the sum of Rs.7612 as premium.  The complainant got periodical service of his car from OP No.1 and also took all the necessary precautions regarding change of engine oil/filter etc. from time to time. It is further stated that the complainant got the vehicle repaired on 29.11.2018 from Karnal Motors OP No.1 and incurred Rs.11,138/-  which is evident from invoice No.008/BR/18005712 dated 29.11.2018 and the OP No.2 delivered the car after repairs that the said vehicle is fit for long journey on 30.11.2018 and when the complainant was on the way from Kurukshetra to Raibarely (UP) the said vehicle became defective ,so a mechanic was called from M/s Taneja Automobiles , 27, Jawahar Market Bareli.  The said vehicle remained in workshop from 30.11.2018 to 10.12.2018 where the complainant incurred  the total sum of Rs.20,692/-  on account of purchase of oil and other material from Faiq Raza Motors, Raibarely on 28.12.2018 as mentioned in para no.4 of the complainant and  in total spent the sum of Rs.63,164/- on the repairs of the car. The complainant had got repaired the car from Ops on 29.11.2018 and this fact shows that the Ops had not repaired the vehicle properly, therefore, the vehicle became defective. Besides, the complainant was mentally harassed due to  wrong repairs of the vehicle  by the Ops and  it amounts to deficiency in services on the part of the Ops.

3.                Notice of the complaint was given to the Ops but the Ops failed to appear and contest the case despite due service. Therefore, Ops were proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 19.03.2021.

4.                The complainant in support of his case has filed affidavit Ex.CW1/A and tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-14 and closed his evidence.

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the  material available on the case file.

6.                The learned counsel for the complainant while reiterating the averments made in the application has argued that purchased a Maruti Swift  Dzire  ZDI  Car (Diesel) from OP No.1 and got its insured from United India Insurance Co. Limited Kurukshetra and the said policy was valid from 26.01.2019 to 27.01.2020 and paid the sum of Rs.7612 as premium.  It is further argued that the  complainant got periodical service of his car from OP No.1 and also took all the necessary precautions regarding change of engine oil/filter etc. from time to time. It is further stated that the complainant got the vehicle repaired on 29.11.2018 from Karnal Motors OP No.1 and incurred Rs.11,138/-  which is evident from invoice No.008/BR/18005712 dated 29.11.2018 and the OP No.2 delivered the car after repairs that the said vehicle is fit for long journey on 30.11.2018 and when the complainant was on the way from Kurukshetra to Raibarely (UP) the said vehicle became defective ,so a mechanic was called from M/s Taneja Automobiles , 27, Jawahar Market Bareli.  The said vehicle remained in workshop from 30.11.2018 to 10.12.2018 where the complainant incurred  the total sum of Rs.20,692/-  on account of purchase of oil and other material from Faiq Raza Motors, Raibarely on 28.12.2018 as mentioned in para no.4 of the complainant and  in total spent the sum of Rs.63,164/- on the repairs of the car. The complainant had got repaired the car from Ops on 29.11.2018 and this fact shows that the Ops had not repaired the vehicle properly, therefore, the vehicle became defective and there is deficiency in services on the part of the Ops.

7.                     In this case both the Ops have been proceeded against ex parte vide order dated  19.03.2021 but it does mean that the case of the complainant succeeds. The complainant has failed to prove on the file that the vehicle became defective during long journey due to deficiency in repairs of the car at  the hands of the Ops.  The complainant has not got filed affidavit from Taneja Automobiles, Bareli that the repairs carried out at Kurukshetra were not in order or any defective part has been put in the vehicle. Machinery can become defective due to several reasons. It may be so due to long driving  or otherwise. In the net shell there is not an iota of evidence to prove that the Ops have put some defective part or the procedure adopted by the Ops in repairs of the said vehicle was not in order or otherwise. Therefore, the complaint filed by the complainant fails as no deficiency in services on the part of the Ops is made out.

8.                          For the reasons recorded above, we do not find any merit in the present complaint, therefore, the present complaint is hereby dismissed without any relief to the complainant. Certified copy of the order be supplied to the parties concerned and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced in the open Commission.

Dated: 27.10.2021.                                              ( Mrs.Neelam Kashyap)

                                                                                President.

 

                             (Issam Singh                  (Ms.Neelam)

                               Member                           Member.